On science and mortality

A few years ago, analysts with the National Bureau of Economic Research decided to try to quantify the headlock that “elite scientists” exert on their chosen disciplines. They wanted to know if Nobel laureate Max Planck’s lamentation on ego could be statistically proven: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

Targeting the life sciences, NBER formed a database of 12,935 scientists whose publication performance, patents, funding levels and peer pedigrees – i.e., membership in the National Academies of Science or the Institute of Medicine – satisfied baseline criteria. From there, NBER whittled the field down to 452 names. All were considered the rock stars of their generation, circa 1975-2003. More significantly, every one died before they retired.

The results of the study – published in December under the headline “Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?” – showed how subsequent publication activity by the deceased stars’ colleagues tapered off precipitously, by 40 percent, following the deaths of the luminaries. Into that vacuum surged the work of non-collaborators. It went up 8 percent within a year. Within five years, papers by the non-collaborators “fully offset the productivity decline of collaborators.”

Is this really what it ‘s gonna take to jump-start serious research into UFOs?/CREDIT: expertbeacon.com

NBER summed up what had been happening this way: “The idiosyncratic stances of individual scientists can do much to alter, or at least delay, the course of scientific advance.” Conclusion: “While co-authors suffer after the passing of a superstar, it is not simply the case that star scientists in a competing lab assume leadership mantle. Rather, the boost comes largely from outsiders who appear to tackle the mainstream questions within the field but by leveraging newer ideas that arise in other domains.”

Uh-oh. Outsiders.

Which brings us to the latest paint-by-numbers whimsy from astronomer Seth Shostak, 72.

Champion of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence via the exclusive mode of radiotelescopes, author of four books, plus 60-some peer-reviewed research papers, not to mention 300 or so popular articles ranging from astronomy to technology, Shostak is so inside-the-box he even co-authored a college-level textbook on astrobiology. Plus he’s made a multitude of appearances on documentaries and TV series. Smart guy, clearly. Elite. He was rewarded for those efforts in December when he received the Carl Sagan Prize for Science Popularization. And as a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, he never misses a chance to remind Americans that UFOs are a waste of time. Thus:

Sensing a potential affront to mainstream groupthink with Hillary Clinton’s recent advocacy for transparent federal UFO documents, Shostak felt the need to translate her avowed interest into language Huffington Post readers could understand. From his opening sentence – “If you’re worried about little gray guys with no hair and amygdaloid eyes, Hillary Clinton wants to help” – it’s eminently clear that the senior astronomer with the SETI Institute has disqualified himself from any meaningful discussion on The Great Taboo.

Shostak does what he always does. He falls back on the veracity of the USAF’s dreadfully bollixed Project Blue Book, and he characterizes “those whose psyches are invested in the alien visitation story” as delusional thinkers. No allowance, of course, for people who make no such claims, people who think radar tracks of weird *&#! in the sky are interesting, and for people who wish that authority figures like Shostak would quit proselytizing and actually investigate events occurring in the 21st century. Or, failing that, at least quit misrepresenting things, like the British Ministry of Defence’s position on UFOs.

“The MOD said that after more than a half-century of taking hotline tips, they had learned nothing of either military or scientific value,” writes Shostak, who doesn’t even have to Google UFOs anymore because he’s riding Yuri Milner’s $100M SETI gravy train. “They also released tens of thousands of related government documents.”

Well, no, sorry man, you’re totally wrong on that first point. According to an MOD study declassified in 2006, referred to as Project Condign, the Brits are definitely interested in pursuing what it prefers to call Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. That’s the same term Clinton used last week in her Jimmy Kimmel interview. Struggling to make sense of the evidence they considered from 1997-2000, UK analysts agreed to describe UAP as “buoyant plasma formations.” Under the MoD’s definition, UAP is a meteorological phenomenon so bizarre, so intense, that it can subject observers to radiation exposure, hallucinations, “lost time” episodes, and even cause pilots to make evasive maneuvers.

“The relevance of plasma and magnetic fields to UAP was an unexpected feature of the study. It is recommended,” declared the authors, “that further investigation should be (undertaken) into the applicability of various characteristics in various novel military applications.”

Whoa, hey, crazy “weather,” huh? With defense implications to boot. Mmmm . . . smells like $$$. Still, 10 years after the declassification of Condign, and no followup to speak of. That could mean one of two things: 1) Classified research is ongoing or, more likely, 2) a more informed generation of scientists is waiting for speed bumps like Shostak to get out of the way so a less doctrinaire era of inquiry can begin.

I just read another article that refers to the “Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?” article on the Guardian website about established scientific views on nutrition and how ‘giants’ in the field have bulldozed dissenting voices. It’s heartening to see that maybe just maybe people are coming around a bit in terms of moving away from long-held norms of blindly believing authorities based on past successes. And when you consider that the scientific community is supposed to be based upon exactly the opposite of this (in the Guardian article it’s explained this way: “In physics, […]You look for the anomalous result. Then you have something to explain. In nutrition, the game is to confirm what you and your predecessors have always believed.”) it all seems rather self-defeating. I do hope the Funeral article gets more and more exposure and helps to move our thinking away from these outdated processes and practices for advancing knowledge.
This too is hopeful: “the internet has flattened hierarchies everywhere they exist. We no longer live in a world in which elites of accredited experts are able to dominate conversations about complex or contested matters”.http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin

ab discus,
I was invited to join a group of physicists and mathematicians some time ago*. These young folks are extremely disappointed with the entrenched system of peer review and consequent reinforcement of the Paradigm. The system has moved from Old Masters to Entrenched Bureaucracy. Independent thinkers are no long jousting with Super-Brains. They now have to fight hundreds of organized sycophants, whose primary function is to protect their Fortress of Thought at all costs. The peer review system guarantees this. It works backwards: We got a theory now, let’s do experiments that prove it to be true, and ignore the ones that may falsify it. Real science demands deducing theories from experiments, then experimenting to -disprove- that theory. This rigorous approach is -demanded- by real science, but it’s not happening. What we have is Science Theater, with actors like Shostak, Tyson, etc., and ‘science writers’ who don’t know their bum** from a hole in the ground.

Unlike individuals, The Bureaucracy never dies. It simply brainwashes new generations of acolytes.

Best wishes to the young turks who are trying to change the system!
———-
* need I mention that I’m very much out of my league. Sort of like a gocart racer in an F1 race:)
** God forbid I should offend someone.
. .. . .. — ….

I beg to differ with the last paragraph of your post.The MSM continues to either be complicit or fawns over the so-called authority figurus in the science community that aggravates me and discussions like this are still related to the fringe.

@Billy and all: I know it’s going off on a tangent, but I think it’s important to expand on the point explored below regarding how alien is ‘alien’?:

One of the reasons people dismiss the paranormal is because we know so much about the ‘normal’: We understand much about matter; the periodic table has no gaps among the naturally occurring elements. We know about the electromagnetic spectrum. Our day-to-day models are complete.

It’s often stated that communication with an alien race would begin with mathematics, because universal constants and relationships are… universal. PI may be called something different on another world, but it’s still approximately 3.14 in base ten wherever you go.
Likewise, aliens would know about matter and they would know about the electromagnetic spectrum. We share a common universe and *that* is our common frame of reference. Any intelligent, space-faring race will be rational and will know the things we know. Give an alien delegation a tour of a foundry and show them the smelting process – they will know what they’re looking at. Show them the process for the fabrication and use of a radio receiver, and they will understand.

Biological evolution results in similar designs for similar problems, including mobility, dexterity, sensing and thinking. (Perhaps alien biochemistry would be identical to ours, but that’s not entirely relevant.) What an alien sees and does, will have parallels on Earth. Whether it’s consuming fuel and resources, building telescopes and fast vehicles, or recycling, the complete list is significant. As rational entities, we can predict much of how they will engage with, and react to, their/our environment. (Maslow likely applies to aliens too.)

To put it simply: aliens probably put their pants on, one tentacle at a time.

f,
I would hope that aliens might have a better understanding of subatomic physics. We’ve done well for ourselves in technology, well enough, anyway. (We haven’t done so well in our social development, and that trumps technological progress.)

albert,
I think you’ll agree that – based upon decades of corroborated observational data and the few radar tapes available – “they” utilize and have mastered energies and forces as yet undiscovered by modern science. Our own physicists admit that currently they can observe and measure only a fraction of the energies, or “energy density” (and matter, for that matter), that is calculated to exist in cosmos. What is “dark energy” and “dark matter” to us might be standard components of “their” technology.
~~
And with regard to subatomic physics, they not only might understand that realm…they might exist in it. There’s a concept slowly gaining traction that the visitors (and their crafts, of course) normally exist in a state of matter at a higher level of vibration, or wavelength, that what we understand as physical matter (solid, liquid, gas) ; invisible to our eyes and instruments, but still substance. Subatomic.
I don’t mean a parallel universe or sideways dimension where biological beings have found a way to slip into ours, I mean a level, or “plane,” in the Reality we inhabit that we haven’t discovered yet.
By intentionally lowering the vibrational rate of the particles that the crafts are made of…they become visible to us. By raising the vibratory rate back to their norm…invisible. This might explain the numerous sightings where witnesses claimed the objects/crafts simply vanished, faded away, or became translucent. It might also explain the shape-shifting seen by many.
It’s not supernatural or paranormal, but another undiscovered natural aspect of that Universal Life in which we live and move and have our being.

Joe,
Here’s the rub: the concept I outlined…if true…means that in order to observe and understand it we need a jump in evolution; not in material technology, but in consciousness, or conscious awareness.
Thankfully, there are a few theoretical scientists who are beginning to see this.

Bill,
In his ground-breaking paper, Don Hotson paved the way for an understanding of sub-atomic physics that includes theories for energetic systems [my term]. Some examples are: anti-gravitic systems, instantaneous communication, energetic healing(acupuncture, acupressure, homeopathy), ‘mind-control’ techniques for healing purposes: meditation, Chi Gong, Tai Chi, etc.. Hypnotism and ‘paranormal’ phenomena like telepathy come under this heading as well. It may be that we are simply physical manifestations of spiritual beings, as the ancients believed. Again, this idea is reflected in our mythologies.

Doesn’t your reference to radio technology run contrary to the general consensus on this blog that the SETI program is obsolete since since advanced forms of intelligence have moved away to more exotic forms of communication that is beyond our current comprehension?

Actually, I think SETI could succeed. Who knows? It’s a deep cosmic ocean. It’s just that when its advocates promote their unsubstantiated methodologies while ignoring/deriding the copious UFO data that actually does exist, they’re not operating in the spirit of science.

@freeman69,
“… tried to explain the unexpected success of ego-less, collaborative efforts in contrast to the output of traditional, monolithic companies….”

I don’t believe the success of community-based efforts should be unexpected. The -community- is the key. ‘Traditional, monolithic companies’ are the outmoded bastard children of the top-down models of political governance. For example, a free, open-source operating system might the a goal of a group of programmers, who are willing to -invest- their time and effort to produce one. That’s the -goal-, not the desire for profit, which is the goal of investors in a corporation, who usually don’t give a RSA about the product being produced.

There are many communities that exist, and are being created around the world by people who recognize a need, and move to fill it. Often, only organization is needed. Crowd-sourcing has proved to be extremely successful in raising funds for such community startups. Pardon me for preaching to the choir here.

It’s not difficult to imagine extraterrestrial civilizations (ECs) that have encountered the sorts of problems we face here. If, as Ancient Astronaut theorists believe, we have been seeded here, then we could assume that there is at least one advanced civilization besides us in the universe. We are drawing ever closer to the day when -we- will have the capabilities to ‘seed’ our progeny on another planet. What kind of beings would we like to see on that planet? Beings like us? New, improved us? Exploitable us?

I think we need to learn a lot more about the social development (if you prefer, social evolution) of our species. Spiritual development is perhaps even more important. Why?
Because it leads to community-based systems. Theocracies (and pseudo-theocracies) are outmoded, and should be relegated to dark footnotes in ancient texts.

Are we to assume that there are myriad civilizations in the Universe, with unique developmental paths? If so, then any kind of EC we can imagine may exist. If we view ourselves as typical, then perhaps all ECs are following our developmental path, some ahead of us, some behind.

In either case, we have a lot to learn about how -our- social and spiritual development works. It it encoded in our DNA, or is DNA constantly being edited? Or both?

Sometimes, I wish we could call in some ‘outside experts’. I fear we may destroy ourselves before we reach enlightenment, after the feature ends, but before we see the credits….
. .. . .. — ….

According to some AA theorists, our entire mythology (and from that, our religions) has its origin in ET visits and ET-human interactions. It’s logical. It’s cause and effect. Contrast this to the prevailing notion that all this stuff (and us, too) ‘just happened’ ‘by chance’. Granted, AA theories amount to kicking the can down the road(but hey, if we evolved, why couldn’t they?)), but why toss out a good theory just because we ‘don’t believe’ in ETs?
. .. . .. — ….

Hi Billy,
Maybe I overstated my case. I see a lot in the ufo community that adds up to “smoke and mirrors” on a major scale. In any event, I do sincerely appreciate your work and efforts. I, too, become frustrated and I just want to move on and pretend that there is nothing to see.
I would say, though, that sometimes a flying saucer is just a flying saucer.
Keep up the good work!

The probable future of ufology looks interesting: not only due to the private development of multi-sensor surveillance systems, but because of the increasing awareness of the impact of psychology.

Witnesses, researchers, debunkers, scientists and (we would expect) extraterrestrial intelligences are affected by psychology. Any intelligent organism, functioning within a society, will be influenced, in its decision making, by its peers.
There were two very interesting interviews recently: the first was Jesse Marcel III on ‘The Unexplained’, the other was Tom DeLonge on C2C with George Knapp. Each represents a different point within the ufological domain. Neither presents ‘proof’ and, in some respects, they seem to present mutually exclusive cases, but who amongst us doesn’t want to know what the underlying truths are?

What about the aliens? Could they be technologically advanced, but psychologically fallible? Is there some fundamentally profound, provable truth about the universe, that potentially alters understanding, that we have yet to discover? Is the concept of world-munching alien monsters as ludicrously extreme as that of zen-like space brothers?

What of our future? Will humanity eventually function under a single world government? How do we balance the extremes of anarchic freedoms and totalitarian security? I recently read an ‘old’ paper on open-source programming called The Cathedral and the Bazaar, which tried to explain the unexpected success of ego-less, collaborative efforts in contrast to the output of traditional, monolithic companies. Do alien empires function with a bureaucratic core, but rely upon distributed collaboration towards the rim? Where do new ideas come from?

As much as we need to move outwards to make new discoveries; insights require a degree of introspection.

I suspect swarm societies are much more efficient than anything our own civilizations have been able to deliver. We don’t even understand the nature of consciousness in our own species, to say nothing of evolution’s handiwork elsewhere. Again, as famed myrmecologist Mark Moffett reminds us, “neither ant colonies nor supercomputers need consciousness to make smart choices.” I’m afraid any analogies within our capacity to imagine will be inadequate.

@Billy: I’m no expert, but I can see that insect colonies can exchange information via chemicals and visual cues, and behave as a loosely connected network. However, the functioning and efficiency of synaptically connected neurons (in groups that far outnumber animal colonies) is in a different league. We have consciously directed thought including computational thinking (i.e. abstraction, decomposition, algorithms etc).
Even with this overwhelming advantage, compared to insects, our species includes many examples of individuals with ‘processing’ difficulties. However, we represent the minimum level of consciousness and awareness required to build spaceships. Technologically advanced aliens would require a similar (biological) information processing capability; and would likely experience many of the numerous problems associated with the ‘brain’ and ‘mind’.
There’s more reason to think that we’d be similar than different.

ooooh boy….If those questions are truly important to you, freeman, allow me to humbly suggest two fairly short books. Try not to be prejudiced by the titles, and try to temporarily put aside what you believe or think you know about the UFO/ET phenomenon so you can approach them with that rarest of gifts – a truly open mind.
…
The Gathering of the Forces of Light, by Benjamin Creme. Share International Foundation.
Here To Help: UFOs And The Space Brothers, by Gerard Aartsen. BGA Publications
…
They might not set off fireworks of Eurekas! in your mind, but they do address many of the questions you raised (and more) from unique perspectives. You might even be fascinated.
…
(Now I’ve probably just sabotaged what little credibility I have among this group.)

There are only two types of people in the world and conscious entities in the universe.

Those who are engaged in Service to Self or those who are engaged in Service to Others.

So anyone who is foolish enough to conclude that any and all ET’s who are interacting with planet earth and earthbound human beings are just “Here to Help” as Gerard Aartsen (and others) contend are potentially in for a very nasty surprise compliments of the Service to Self group.

Seth Shostak is just another pedantic putz, pseudo-skeptic, who is terrified of anything HE perceives as “paranormal” or “anomalous”. So like all pseudo-skeptics he covers himself in his “Skeptic Check” security blanket in an attempt to allay his fears, while at the same time bolstering his ego. In so doing he exposes himself as a classic example of someone who is all about Service to Self. The other dead giveaway in that regard is his service to mammon (aka/money). Enter the Russian Billionaire named Yuri Milner.

But what I really find amusing about pseudo skeptic “debunkers” like Shostak, is their claim that they are “critical thinkers”, when in reality they are the exact opposite.

Larry,
With all due respect – “… there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

Shostak is our modern equivalent of Monsignor Francesco Ingoli, a “scientist” who published long essays disputing Galileo’s theory of heliocentrism. Those essays formed the basis for the charges against Galileo at his trial by the Inquisition.
Shostak often claims he has “looked at the evidence” and is not convinced. He then characterizes decades worth of collected physical trace evidence and observational data as: “…anecdotes and blurred photos.” He’s basically the celebrity front man for the debunkers and deep state cover-up group.
The larger issue is the marginalization of the subject by the MSM. When Shostak writes about the Great Taboo (at the Huff-Post, for example) it appears on the home page. When equally capable and more knowledgeable researchers write about it, their articles appear in the Weird News section deep inside the site.
I’ve never seen a single article by a credible UAP researcher questioning the validity of SETI appear anywhere prominent in the MSM.

…As to the NBER study, it makes sense to me. It validates, in my opinion, Kuhn’s thinking in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. It’s a question of old vs. new paradigms. The old, conventional paradigms are held by established, peer revered scientists often well beyond their applicability to real world circumstances and new discoveries. Ideology often trumps reality.

I think what I am trying to state is that there appears to be some unknown/unofficial group that may be controlling information to the public via PR shills and go to scientists , along with a MSM that may not even (collectively/consciously) be aware that they are being manipulated. But then again I am way behind the times here on this blog and cannot pinpoint a particular conspiracy angle- except that there is an undercurrent to maintain the status quo via whatever means is possible. I am not yet proficient in text via my newly acquired smart phone so I reverted back to my netbook.

…He’s the eloquent, established, science accredited reinforcer (or should I make that enforcer) of the prevailing social and scientific paradigm. He might be a cynic, and knows that if he were to veer from that his credibility and especially funding would wither. But I don’t think that’s the case. He seems dogmatically invested in a certain belief system; the perfect mouthpiece for keeping the public ill-informed and mis-informed about the subject.
…Ironically, he’s a ‘fellow’ with the skeptics society. Why haven’t they focussed their debunking antennas on SETI itself? There’s never been a shred of evidence produced to prove the usefulness of that multi-million dollar program.

Billy,
A bit off topic, but the issue I find revealing is Hillary Clinton’s emphasis on Unidientified Aeriel Phenomenon. She certainly seemed to be trying to re-educate the American audience on Jimmy Kimmel’s show. They are NOT UFO!!! Or so Hillary would so patronize us.
Touche, Hillary! This is code (that she is taking from John Podesta). Listen up Steve Bassett! Mr. Podesta and Hillary will take their cues from the likes of Leslie Kean, John Alexander, and Antonio Paris vis a vis UFO’s, I mean UAPS. Hello…is anyone listening??? This sounds like Bobby Ray Inman is telling Seth to cover for the gang over in Alexandria and Langley and Area 51, woops, I mean Area 54.
Car 54 where are you?

Most astronomers are smart, and Shostek might be one of them even though he has never shown it to me in any of his media appearances. He always comes across as uninformed, biased, and actually stupid when he addresses UFOs which is the only time I see him. Plus, he is in SETI, which has proven itself to be a stupid, money wasting effort, supported by donors who should know better than to provide money to this silly burial ground for the donors’ millions.

Shostack’s quote: Clinton said that she planned to follow up on inquiries made years ago by her husband, and bare what the government really knows about visiting aliens.
I do not recall HRC broaching the distinctive topic of visiting aliens but she has gone on record (as has Podesta) that the public should be informed about the nature of the UFO topic in general- if there are no national security interests at stake. HRC has never referenced visiting aliens.

I seem to recall that Shostack, in past public interviews, remained professional and civil regarding the subject of UFO sightings in general. He was skeptical and discounted the suggestions that there was a need to pursue a full-blown scientific investigation on the matter- but he never denigrated a segment of the population that had a curious interest in the phenomena . It appears now that he may have time on his hands and may be showing his true colors on the subject . I wonder why the sarcastic reference to the morphology of aliens in his OP-ED to the Huffington Post readership. I don’t think that the majority of the informed readers on this particular blog have speculated on physical characteristics of the occupants (if any are occupying true space) within the phenomena. I do think that there is a large portion of the population that has a sincere interest in the subject but would find the Shostack POV written on the Huff Post to be condescending in overtones I hope that Shostack’s peers/colleagues within the mainstream science community are more professional and objective-and do not subscribe to or accept Shostack’s dismissive attitude and ridicule, as displayed in the recent Huff Post piece.

@Billy,
Just when I thought it was safe to kick back with two fingers of single-malt and a Bill Evans record, you bring up 3 of my ‘favorite’ rant topics: the science bureaucracy, Shostak, and SETI. Bloody ‘ell! I’ve already disscussed those topics.

The problem with this EBER article is no one can determine the validity of scientific research by statistical studies based on social/political criteria. That’s the only way one can determine if science has advanced. Many enshrined ‘scientific facts’ were bogus in 1934, and they’re still bogus today. To assume that science advances with the passage of time is absurd. I wonder how many of those dead giants would accept the foolishness that passes for science today. Are there any real giants in science at present? I suspect that there are only sycophants, incapable of any original thought, who can only build upon the safe and acceptable work that’s already been done.

So, in answer to the question: “Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?” No! Science advances when individuals have “peeked past the giants who are blocking the light” (Petr Beckmann).

Yes, it’s too bad there are rock-star wannabes like Shostak, but, hey, They’re symptomatic of the degeneration of Western culture. We are a world leader in degeneration. Name it, and we can take it down.

Milners SETI tax writeoff grant happened only last year, so we won’t see the SETI tax returns for a while. Remember, the last available single-year data showed the SETI search project costs listed as around $700,000, out of the ~$19,000,000 government grants. Now, it’ll be interesting to see the returns after the gravy starts flowing. Will taxpayers dollars keep flowing?

Wouldn’t it be nice if Shostack would:
1. Take the time to read this blog
2. Step back, take a deep breath and post here with his counter view points on some of the more significant ( UAP) events that were viewed by credible witnesses.-rather than using the forum of the Huff Post for his POV’s
3. Be a stand up guy and acknowledge that maybe the current SETI model may not be the way to go.
4. Step out of the box from his comfort zone and show some humility instead of espousing more doctrine.
Most (informed) readers view the Huff Post as a source for young impressionable viewers who are baited to click on the tabloid variety daily features presented by the site.

NAH!!…………. I have to take hold of myself and understand that none of the items on my wishlist here will ever come to pass in my lifetime.

Joe,
If wishes were horses then beggars would ride. Wish in one hand, and…well you get the idea. I think a more interesting wish would be to find out what Shostak really thinks about all this. Does a reasonably intelligent individual choose to remain ignorant of easily available facts? Does a talented, creative musician abandon good music to play shit because it’s popular? Does a PR person sell his soul to the devil for a paycheck? Does a scientist remain blissfully ignorant, fat, dumb, and happy, because the shekels keep rolling in?
If you can stomach it, peruse Shostaks wiki. He’s a bonafide, card-carrying skepti-bunker. As such, he’s happy to debunk anything he’s totally ignorant about. A shining example of ‘those who can, do; those who can’t, become PR flacks’.
. .. . .. — ….